(a) why did the Leader of the Opposition fail to observe his responsibilities under the Members Code of Conduct, paragraph 8 to ensure, in relation to the acquittal of work hours by staff employed by him under the LAMS Act 1989, by allowing periods of up to 22 months to elapse without staff in his office submitting appropriate documentation in relation to attendance, TOIL and overtime;

(b) how did the Leader of the Opposition satisfy himself that recollections of attendance up to 22 months earlier were the correct recollection of attendance when he certified those records to be correct;

(c) what documentary evidence has been relied upon for the retrospective approvals for unpaid leave and attendance at work during the extensive periods in question?

(d) does the Director of Electorate Services in the office of the Leader of the Opposition work in the Leader’s Legislative Assembly office in a full-time capacity;

(e) if so, does the Director of Electorate Services have written approval to work off-site away from the office of the Leader of the Opposition in accordance with clause E8 of the Enterprise Agreement;

(f) has there been consultation with Corporate Services in accordance with clause E8.2 of the Enterprise Agreement and if so, when was that consultation and with whom;

(g) does the Director of Electorate Services in the office of the Leader of the Opposition currently occupy the position of the President of the Canberra Liberals;

(h) does this person work in the latter capacity from Level 5, 221 London Circuit, Canberra City;

(i) if so, has the holder of these positions sought and received unpaid leave from the Leader of the Opposition’s employment prior to any work as President of the Canberra Liberals, during normal working hours;

(j) have any other staff of the Leader of the Opposition have written approval to work off-site; if so, in what capacity and for what periods;

(k) have any staff employed by the Leader of the Opposition undertaken party political campaigning or related activities without having received prior approval for unpaid leave from the Leader of the Opposition; and

(l) if so, have these periods of political campaigning been declared as gifts or gifts in kind under relevant ACT and/or Federal electoral campaign finance laws; if not, why not

For those wondering where the second half of this is going Tio Faulkner is the Director of Electorate Services and also President of the Canberra branch of the Liberal Party.

Because in addition to Zed’s significant homework the Speaker (Shane Rattenbury) has been directed to get a workplace audit done, which will include reconciling the timesheets with the Legislative Assembly’s building access records.

For Zed’s sake one hopes the coming homework, the retrospectively filed timesheets, and the building access records don’t show significant discrepancies.

hmm… i don’t suppose that this might be a pre-emptive strike ahead of the announced budget deficit a mere 400% over estimates… though if that were the case maybe they should have kept their powder dry a bit longer. barr is saying that, despite being a *slight* bit over estimates they plan to bring the budget back into the black as per their original schedule. no need to elaborate on how he might be thinking of doing that, of course…

I can’t believe that we could get stuck with another 4 years of completely incompetent government wasting hundreds of millions of dollars (hopefully they don’t get any worse), because the opposition leader couldn’t run a tiny office.

And the fact that members of the ALP have probably been spending more time organising this sting than actually trying to effectively run our territory pisses me off no end.

It will be very interesting to see how they go about digging themselves out of this. I think we will likely be in for a few surprises as this unfolds. For example, are the building access logs actually retained in a usable format for a defined period of time?

Given they appear to have changed the FOI laws just to let the Canberra Times kick this puppy off I’m willing to bet they’ve made sure the access logs have got the appropriate data.

Somewhat dirty pool, but if you keep handing a man rope who’s fault is it if they hang themselves?

If, (and it’s a big if) the worst comes of this the Liberals involved will, at the end of the day, have been the ones who did themselves down.

I can’t believe that we could get stuck with another 4 years of completely incompetent government wasting hundreds of millions of dollars (hopefully they don’t get any worse), because the opposition leader couldn’t run a tiny office.

I’m kind of glad he was found out to not be able to run a tiny office, before he was voted in run an entire city.

It will be very interesting to see how they go about digging themselves out of this. I think we will likely be in for a few surprises as this unfolds. For example, are the building access logs actually retained in a usable format for a defined period of time?

I can’t believe that we could get stuck with another 4 years of completely incompetent government wasting hundreds of millions of dollars (hopefully they don’t get any worse), because the opposition leader couldn’t run a tiny office.

And the fact that members of the ALP have probably been spending more time organising this sting than actually trying to effectively run our territory pisses me off no end.

But I’m sure their timesheets will be in order, so it’s OK.

I couldn’t agree more. I’m completely disillusioned with politics/politicians. I’m going to become a hippy 🙁

I can’t believe that we could get stuck with another 4 years of completely incompetent government wasting hundreds of millions of dollars (hopefully they don’t get any worse), because the opposition leader couldn’t run a tiny office.

And the fact that members of the ALP have probably been spending more time organising this sting than actually trying to effectively run our territory pisses me off no end.